Elthy

Dont forget the temperature. A blowtorch can cut through steel even though its pressure is in the range of canned air. This will also complicate things with water-cooling, superheavy will literarely vaporize tons of water per second. All that steam will add to the dynamic pressures below the pad.

To bad they sold them.

They propably have to reconsider their whole approach, maybe go for a traditional launchpad like LC-39 with lots of water. A reusable rocket is of no use if the launchpad isnt reusable... Thats what i thought, too. Looks like failing engines took out controls/hydraulics, just like N1.

At launch. But 100t less dry mass will have an extreme impact on delta-v, resulting in an early burnout of the second stage. Either they will have lots of fuel left (which they propably cant vent during the half orbit they are doing) or they start with less than full fuel tanks, which will be more than just 2% of the mass at liftoff.

Did SpaceX say anything about the "payload" of this starship? I think flying it empty could mess up the launch profile, as the acceleration would be way higher and they end up with lots of extra fuel, which would mess up the reentry...

For GPUs i would recommend this: https://www.3dcenter.org/artikel/fullhd-ultrahd-performance-ueberblick-2012-bis-2023 While its a german website the values should be easy to understand even if you dont speak it. They aggregate hardware reviews (with lots of benchmarks each) and calculate a percentage, 100% being some old GPU i cant remember. If you scroll down you will see values for older GPUs and a separate 4k Index, which is more relevant in high resolutions as the cpu can be a limiting factor in 1080p. For comparing CPUs there is sadly no comparable score, the best i know if you want to compare recent hardware is this graphic: https://www.3dcenter.org/abbildung/performance-ueberblick-intel-raptor-lake Again this is aggregated vom lots of reviews.

Im exited for all the new stuff modders will create.

But that would be realy unusual and in total contrast to the GPU requirements. Again, the CPU isnt just calculating stuff thats obvious on the surface, but also the gameengine itself. If you stand still in a shooter after all enemies are down is the CPU idling? Its not, as only a small part of its jobs are reduced now. We can exclude GPU physics for sure, otherwise we would have read about legendary progress in GPU-calculations everywhere in computer news. GPU physic calcualtions are only viable for a realy limited set of scenarios, where there is not much interaction between the simulated particles and accuracy isnt to important. Thats why we have only ever seen it on some graphics eyecandy like hair or debris.

Not realy, its responsible for a lot of things. Physics are usually the limiting factor in KSP due to running on a single thread, but its also doing lots of work in graphics (feeding the GPU with what do do), sound, backgroud simulation. But ive mainly mentioned it because it doesnt fit in with the other mentioned hardware, the other three boxes have comparatable pairings.

The required specs are so strange... The mentioned Athlon is an extremly weak CPU, its from the times before Ryzen and way slower than the i5 6400. But to low minimum specs arent much of an issue, to high ones are: An 2060/5600XT as "minimum" is just crazy. It would be justified for a ultra shiny "the next Crysis" AAA-game, but not for a game with allready outdated graphics, where most of the screen is usually an empty skybox. When comparing the screenshots to other games i would expect something like an 1050ti as minimum, of less...

From what ive heard not muffeling the sound could lead to an oops, as rockets (especialy of this size) are so loud that the reflected soundwaves can damage the rocket on liftoff.

Do you have a tl:dw?

That looks like a reasonable budget build. Maybe you could save a few bucks by going with a i5 12400F or by choosing a Ryzen 5600(X) and an AM4 B550 mainboard. It should play every game quite well on Full-HD, excluding raytracing. Obviously its hard to predict how it will fare in 5 years, but im sure it will be good enough for running all games even then, although at reduced graphics.

I think its something purely decorative, not meant for a space craft, especialy with that logo. It looks like a turtle shell, maybe its related to enviromental stuff?

The link doesnt work for me, also cant find the picture on his profile...

https://www.spiegel.de/ausland/ukraine-krieg-antonow-an-225-groesstes-frachtflugzeug-der-welt-in-truemmern-a-20e79138-d06a-4566-ae40-a5c6a19f3fdc A german new website has an interview with one of the polits, including up close fotage of the wreckage. The pilot says that there is no hope in restoring it, only few parts cound be reused. He is very sad and flew it just two month ago, at that time this seemed unthinkable.

Just a random showerthought: Were there ever temperatures (significantly) below the cosmic background radiation other than those created by intelligent life? It takes realy advaced technologies to reach temperatures that low, i cant imagine a natural process that could achive that. Without active cooling everything would just cool to the cosmic background of about 2.7K, right?

If i remember correctly KSP uses multiple threads for different things. E.g. sound would run on one thread, backround simulation on another. But physics is still on a single thread, which will be the limiting factor in most cases.

I started watching the presentation an got to the questions. There is no new stuff there, right? Small details about Raptor 2, fancy animation, back to back refueling (which the change every year or so). I started watching the questions, but they seem boring, too. Any juciy bits there?

The star ship presentation is at 03:00 here, as i have to wake up at 07:00 i wont watch it live. Hopefully i manage to shield myself from spoilers before i have the time for it. BTW: I want to remind some of you of the option to ignore users, helpful if someone isnt directly violating the forum rules but is spewing the same useless nonsense all the time. You can find it here: https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/ignore/

Cant watch the video right now, but this looks very interessting.

I dont think its a big challenge to redesign starship to include a door, the structural bracing needed to savely interupt the rings will simply add a bit of mass, just like the other mechanisms needed for the door. So propably there are some smart engineers currently busy evaluating different door designs to figure out which one adds the least mass while still being usefull.

Are there any hardpoints on S20 they could use for stacking with the chopsticks?

If wind proves to be an issue they could build some (huge) walls. But propably some smart engineers allready ran the numbers and worked out that they will be fine.

From what ive heard the Tonga volcano eruption is classified as a VEI 5, Tambroa was 7. Each point on that scale is a tenfold increase, so likely the effect will be hard to measure.